Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
According to the US Bureau of Economic Analysis’ latest report, here are the top 5 wealthiest metropolitan areas in the USA:
1. Stamford/Norwalk Metro (CT)
2. Midland Metro (TX)
3. San Francisco Metro (CA)
4. Silicon Valley Metro (CA)
5. Naples Metro (FL)
6. Boston Metro (MA)
Connecticut’s Gold Coast became the wealthiest pocket of the nation last year, according to new federal estimates on average personal income...The Greenwich-Bridgeport corridor had average income of nearly $106,700 in 2016, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis...The gain was enough to knock Midland, Texas from the top spot, which was the only other region nationally to hit six figures in personal income despite a 7.5 percent decline from 2015. San Francisco, Silicon Valley, Naples, Fla. and Boston rounded out the top half-dozen.
Midland, TX surprised me due to its low population and isolation. I can't think of any major corp. based there. I would think Washington DC metro would be higher because of the all the governmental jobs associated with NoVA and Bethesda, MD area.
Both Midland, TX and Naples, FL surprised me. Granted, I know next to nothing about Midland, TX, why would it be one of the wealthiest areas of the country? Naples, FL is a retirement destination and while many wealthy retirees buy homes there, there are a lot of poor people there wiping their butts and serving them drinks and mowing their lawns.
I was expecting to see Washington DC somewhere in the top 5.
Midland, TX surprised me due to its low population and isolation. I can't think of any major corp. based there. I would think Washington DC metro would be higher because of the all the governmental jobs associated with NoVA and Bethesda, MD area.
Midland/Odessa has been going through a huge oil boom over the last 20 years or so. The regional oil processors were offering huge hourly wages to attract a labor pool. Those wages aren't coming from the types of jobs people on here traditionally associate with such things. I imagine the last couple years have cooled it down quite a bit.
Midland, TX surprised me due to its low population and isolation. I can't think of any major corp. based there. I would think Washington DC metro would be higher because of the all the governmental jobs associated with NoVA and Bethesda, MD area.
Midland is in the oil patch. Has been for decades.
1. Stamford/Norwalk Metro (CT) - NYC Suburbs
2. Midland Metro (TX) - Oil
3. San Francisco Metro (CA) - Nothing needs to be said here
4. Silicon Valley Metro (CA) - ^
5. Naples Metro (FL) - Retirees from MA/CT/NY/NJ/IL
6. Boston Metro (MA) - A bit surprised that Boston metro is here but not NYC metro, San Diego metro or maybe even DC Metro (Bethesda/Arlington/Alexandria). Boston is extremely affluent, but does have it's share of low income cities scattered throughout.
Besides, isn't Stamford/Norwalk a part of NYC metro much like Arlington, VA is part of D.C metro? According to wiki it is. That leads me to ask, isn't that a sub metro? Aren't there other sub metro areas that would make this list before Boston as a whole? Like Boston's metro west sub metro, Chicago's north shore sub metro.
I’m not sure about Chicago’s north shore, but the area of Connecticut next to NYC - even though it’s in the shadows of NYC - has millions of people living and working there. Many think it’s all commuters into Manhattan, but CT has the second largest amount of Hedge Funds in the world, second to London. Other than that, I can’t imagine why they’d separate it from NYC. Silicon Valley is also separated from SF, likely for a similar reason (economy).
I was expecting to see Washington DC somewhere in the top 5.
The fact that this measures personal per capita income, as opposed to median household income, makes the difference. The DC area is tops in the latter for sure due to high-paying government/contracting jobs, but it's not a corporate town a la Boston, NYC, and San Francisco, hence not quite as much "1%-er"-type uber-wealth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwj119
Besides, isn't Stamford/Norwalk a part of NYC metro much like Arlington, VA is part of D.C metro? According to wiki it is. That leads me to ask, isn't that a sub metro? Aren't there other sub metro areas that would make this list before Boston as a whole? Like Boston's metro west sub metro, Chicago's north shore sub metro.
Yeah, not sure of their methodology of breaking up some metro areas like they have. But either way, I don't think Stamford/Norwalk's separation from NYC knocked it down too much.
The Top 20 ranking makes it pretty clear also that the Northeast Corridor, not shockingly, packs an insane amount of wealth, with all five of the major Northeast Corridor metros included: Boston (#6), DC (#9), NYC (#10), Philly (#18) and Baltimore (#20), in addition to other smaller areas like "Gold Coast" area of CT already mentioned and the Trenton, NJ (#15) and Hartford, CT (#17) areas.
The fact that this measures personal per capita income, as opposed to median household income, makes the difference. The DC area is tops in the latter for sure due to high-paying government/contracting jobs, but it's not a corporate town a la Boston, NYC, and San Francisco, hence not quite as much "1%-er"-type uber-wealth.
Actually, San Francisco is tops when measuring HHI, not DC.
Household income doesn’t give an accurate picture, since households are of all different sizes. You can have a house of 10 friends all making 50k a year, and that household will go down on paper as having an income of 500k even though there are actually 10 people making only 50k. For that reason, personal income is far more indicative of a region’s wealth.
You’re right when you say DC doesn’t have the 1% wealth that NY, CT, MA and CA have. DC has a significant population that is solidly upper middle class - not uber wealthy - but uniformly high enough that allows them to compete with the 1%er areas in the Northeast and West.
The fact that this measures personal per capita income, as opposed to median household income, makes the difference. The DC area is tops in the latter for sure due to high-paying government/contracting jobs, but it's not a corporate town a la Boston, NYC, and San Francisco, hence not quite as much "1%-er"-type uber-wealth.
Yeah, not sure of their methodology of breaking up some metro areas like they have. But either way, I don't think Stamford/Norwalk's separation from NYC knocked it down too much.
The Top 20 ranking makes it pretty clear also that the Northeast Corridor, not shockingly, packs an insane amount of wealth, with all five of the major Northeast Corridor metros included: Boston (#6), DC (#9), NYC (#10), Philly (#18) and Baltimore (#20), in addition to other smaller areas like "Gold Coast" area of CT already mentioned and the Trenton, NJ (#15) and Hartford, CT (#17) areas.
Yep.
What the DC area benefits from more than anything is you have a high concentration of high income couples (husband makes $150,000 - wife makes $110,000 bringing their HHI to $260,000 which isn't a lot in this area) but honestly as far as wealth in the 1% sense, there's no competition with Boston, Manhattan and CT.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
